Saturday, August 02, 2008

Sauce Poll

Here's the result of last week's poll:

Bit surprised about the downer you all have on big agencies. Is it just that the word big means bad? Personally I like big agencies. The photocopiers usually work, and there's plenty of different accounts to have a go at. Medium-sized I like too. Not keen on the small Agency. If you don't get on with someone, it's a problem - you're around them the whole time. Whereas in bigger places you can easily seek out folk you like and not see ones you don't.

As it's Summer, this week's poll is even more frivolous than usual.

I'm asking: Who do you most prefer to date? A supposedly complicated Creative type? Or does the intellectual cut-and-thrust of a relationship with a Planner suit you best? Perhaps the people skills and expense account of a Suit works for you. Or do you find the organisational skills + short skirts in a TV dept. the ideal combo?

Yet again you're surprised at the results of one of your polls? You shouldn't be. It's just more evidence that you're invariably wrong - about anything to do with advertising that is. What did you say about Dave Trott? That you disagree with about 80% of what he says? Again, it's just demonstrates how you're always wrong - because Dave is always right.

Anyway... I agree with the previous comment. The comment of 5.07pm is a fucking disgrace. As are you for keeping it on here while censoring others. Either have *complete* free speech or get your moral compass oiled.

9.29 - I allow anti-Juan or anti-anyone comments as long as they are not obscene.

9.38 - I don't know. Write it and I'll take a look.

But if you look closely at 5.07's language (I'm very interested in language, always have been and especially at the moment since I'm reading Steven Pinker's "The Language Of Thought") it's not a clear-cut case.

First of all, he's talking about a fictional character. That's not as bad as bad-mouthing a real person.

Second of all, he's expressing a weird kind of affection for her. That's not as bad as outright abuse.

Third of all, by giving two competing descriptions of her, he kind of undermines himself.

So it's the WAY something is said, not actually what IS said that matters?

Bit hard to convey tone in the written word unless there's context or you know the person. If you said Bush is a simpleton in a comedy club that's fine.Say it in Congress and I think it becomes a different matter.

My coment saying "The one with the biggest tits" was both hilarious and misogynistic. And sexist. Who's to say the planner or account man has to be a woman? It could be a male account man or planner.And it's homophobic a bit isn't it? I don't know. All I know is it's hilarious and if you disagree with me, you are wrong.

UPDATE. I've deleted all the comments on here relating to sex with people who have Down's Syndrome.

Although Google haven't informed me exactly which post on this blog caused the activation of their Hate Crimes division, the strength of feeling in the comments section here leads me to believe it was this one.

Although I stand by my original rationale for not deleting the comment, I have to accept that I am just a tenant here and although I can set the house rules to a certain extent, ultimately it's Google who own the place.

Now, please don't get me into trouble by posting any more hate crime. If you want to say something really rude, write it all down in a letter, and then tear it up. That's what my Grandma always advised.